BACKGROUND: Minimal invasive approaches to managing caries, such as partial caries removal techniques and atraumatic restorative treatment (ART), are showing increasing evidence of improved outcomes over the conventional complete caries removal. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinically and radiographically the effect of ART on restorations using restorative cement and glass ionomer cement (GIC) for dental caries in the deciduous molars of children aged between 4 and 8 years. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: The study design was a split-mouth, randomized, blind clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Eighty-six patients had 108 restorations placed with GIC (Ketac Molar Easy Mix - 3M ESPE) and 108 restorations placed with composite resin (CR) (Filtek Z250 - 3M ESPE). The restorations were assessed by means of images obtained with a digital camera and periapical radiographs at baseline and after 12 months of follow-up. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The Student's t-test, Pearson Chi-squared test, and Bonferroni paired comparison test were used to evaluate the differences in proportions and correlations between the variables. RESULTS: After 12 months of follow-up, the restorations were considered clinically successful in 89.3% of cases and radiographically successful in 80.5% of cases. There was statistical difference neither between the two restorative materials used nor between the numbers of restored surfaces. CONCLUSIONS: GIC and CR can be used successfully for restorations of one or two dental surfaces after ART.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Minimal invasive approaches to managing caries, such as partial caries removal techniques and atraumatic restorative treatment (ART), are showing increasing evidence of improved outcomes over the conventional complete caries removal. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinically and radiographically the effect of ART on restorations using restorative cement and glass ionomer cement (GIC) for dental caries in the deciduous molars of children aged between 4 and 8 years. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: The study design was a split-mouth, randomized, blind clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-six patients had 108 restorations placed with GIC (Ketac Molar Easy Mix - 3M ESPE) and 108 restorations placed with composite resin (CR) (Filtek Z250 - 3M ESPE). The restorations were assessed by means of images obtained with a digital camera and periapical radiographs at baseline and after 12 months of follow-up. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The Student's t-test, Pearson Chi-squared test, and Bonferroni paired comparison test were used to evaluate the differences in proportions and correlations between the variables. RESULTS: After 12 months of follow-up, the restorations were considered clinically successful in 89.3% of cases and radiographically successful in 80.5% of cases. There was statistical difference neither between the two restorative materials used nor between the numbers of restored surfaces. CONCLUSIONS: GIC and CR can be used successfully for restorations of one or two dental surfaces after ART.